after 164k miles... I think it's on it's last legs. I have more diags to perform, but I am of the mindset to replace the long block and move on.

Here are the issue:

1. There is a bit of a random miss.

2. The engine is eating coolant. I have a new DeWitts aluminum radiator in there and there are no leaks anywhere. If the waterpump was leaking, I would expect there to be a belt slippage issue, and there isn't. I just topped it off, and I was down 1/2 gallon in the surge tank. This is happening about every 4~6 weeks.

3. My own stupidity. Three years ago, I beleived Tom at Carolina Clutches that the Fidenza doesn't need to be match balanced. Was I ever wrong. I have a vibration that starts at about 4000 RPM and gets worse... I give up at 4300... It's that bad.

I have found a 1992 LT1 long block at www.vette2vette.com. It's got low miles, 25k, for $1500. It's got the dual mass flywheel attached, so worst case, I get the flywheels match balanced. My current clutch is 40k miles old, so the pressure plate should be ok, and I can replace the insert on the Fidenza. The motor is from a theft recovery, and was stripped of it's accessories before recovery. The engine has been properly pickled since removal about 2 years ago. I might have some room on the engine, money wise. I am going to counter offer on it. Mainly, $1500 and include shipping...

I am also thinking of doing roller rockers... or maybe just getting a hot cam kit... for $570 at Summit, it sure is a deal. Any better deals on that?

Thoughts, gang?

Thanks! :thumbright:

Andy, I would hope that the LT1 should last longer than 164K, but it obviously has some issues. The engine you've located sounds to be a pretty good deal and should get you up a running quicker than rebuilding the engine that's in there.

What's the status on Bastet's car? Is it running yet?

I need to stop fixing other issues and I might get to finishing hers!

I think it's a good deal... time will tell.

My ultimate plan is to take my old motor and rebuild it to a mild 383...

I love the 383s

Why only a mild 383? Mid range at least, if your going to go to the trouble. IMHO


tom

Youve got a rooted head gasket mate. Pull the cap off, start and run the engine from cold and watch the cap neck. Youll probably see little bubbles like i did.

My LT1 didnt mix any fluids when this happened, and it didnt blow white smoke either, so it was a tough call and had to be made with the use of a coolant CO tester to check for combustion type gasses in the coolant.

Im going for a Winfield, be back in a few minutes... (thats a brand of Australian cigarette for those who dont know)

Righto, so to continue, i would recomend getting an LT4 crate engine if you can, youll need to tune, but you will anyway on a 92 if you change the cam.

This gives you a damn fine engine, you get the 1.6rrs, you get better heads and intake, and i reckon youre good for 350 brake horse and about 200,000 miles.

Sure it cost more, but you want to do this right first go, and a long block with 25,000 miles is not my ideal choice for longevity, you never know what can go wrong with that, so many unknowns. For all you know, it couldve sat around for 5 years in which case youll be lucky to get 100,000 miles with no issues. It couldve had the arse flogged out of it, couldve been over heated, over revved, or mis treated in some other way, and 100,000 miles may even be an optimistic figure.

If you were to go with that, first thing id do is pull it apart, bore it over 30 thou, throw in a new rotating assembly, and build up a new engine. If you did that, you may as well buy a bare block.

If the engine came from anywhere else, I would agree. This engine is coming from vette2vette, he only buys the cleanest out there.

This engine came from a theft recovery, it has sat for 2 years, but according to Jason, it has been properly pickled and stored indoors. This is the way it's done here in the states and when done right, it works a-ok. Besides, he gives a pretty good warrantee with his engines.

I have to ask him a couple of question, mainly, did the engine ever run in his presense, if so, it's mine. Most of the time, he likes to have a running motor.

The LT4 is a viable option, but if this motor is good, it's $1500 LESS and that includes the hotcam kit.

I will send the chip to TJ Wong for a burn, or buy one... I am sure this won't be hard to burn up.

Check this one out Andy, seems like a steal, the only issue is the shipping.

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?t=1847362


As we discussed before these damned deals are always far away!

yea, you are so right.

I saw that... and it looks like a nice deal... but I just don't know how well it's bolted together.

At least with a stock factory job, I know what's in it. And right now, mild stock is all I need.

As for the 383, a mild one is easier to get past CARB around here. I am thinking even a mild 383 is going to be good for 400hp.

Besides, that's a while away and we can discuss that when I get closer...

I would agree that the low miles on the stroker makes me a little nervous too, great parts but why did he pull it so soon?

Gosh, I still scream like a girl when I mash the throttle in my stock LT1. I wonder how long it will be before I get jaded by a mere 300hp?

I've driven too many gutless ricers, I guess.

My wife has a brand new Suzuki SX4, and that thing is so slow to accelerate, I think it is dangerous to drive! Seriously.

I'm kind of afraid to mess with my engine. Mostly I just want as reliable a car as I can get. I've driven too many gutless (yet friggin reliable as a stone) ricers, I guess.

You gonna take lots of pix and do a tech write-up on the install if you buy a new motor?

Theft recovery kills the deal straight away for me without a complete tear down and rebuild of the said long block before considering putting a top end on it and kicking it in the guts.

You will never know what happened to that unit before it was stripped of its bits and pieces, and for a very small sum of $1,500 USD (which is absolute chicken feed) id be going to what will be a better starting point.

Hotcam might a pretty sissy cam, but its still not going to work at its best with unported LT1 heads. I dont know if youre planing that or not. Either way you go, if you increase the lift (via the cam or 1.6rrs), your LT1 springs are not worth a damn and need to be replaced. The LT4 has all that, and a servere duty timing set.

I just like to KNOW for certain what im getting is good to go without the issue of ongoing problems. If it fails or causes you issues, there is your $1,500 buffer up and gone.

Then to top this potential off, you have no idea what those bearings have been subject to in their 25,000 miles, moisture in the oil journals isnt out of the question after 2 years of sitting around, and youre looking to add more pressure to them.

Thats all just me, i know youre aware of all these "maybes", which are something i just dont like to play with when there is a very good option that will not only provide a better package, but i reckon better piece of mind as well.

Casey -

Here in lies the rub... GM has been building their crate engines south of the boarder for the last several years. Mexico to be exact. I have heard nightmarish stories of metalurgical failures from these engines. At the same time, I have heard there has been improvement... there had to be.

Here in lies the other rub - I just checked both Superior Chevy and Skoggins-Dickey - NEITHER offer a GMPP LTx motor of any kind off their website. That's nuts.

Some site called www.crateenginedepot.com wants $4000 for an LT1!!!

Golan wants $4300 for their mildly tuned LT1. 360hp/402tq.

Summit doesn't even LIST a catagory for LTx crate engines... they show Gen I and then skip to Gen III... leaving me in the dust.

In short, my options are limited.

If I do the hotcam kit, it includes cam, roller rockers, springs and retainers. I know the heads aren't perfect, but gee, I won't miss the 15 hp that porting them would give, and also, I can do some mild match porting - you know, clean up the heads and intake at the junction.

I understand your concerns, Casey... But I feel the used motor isn't a concern. It's like this - if used motors were so very bad, there wouldn't be a market for them. It's that simple. Right now, Mr Mojo is driving on one... as are countless others.

I spoke to Jason today, via email. I asked three questions:

1. Did the engine ever run for you? yes the engine ran excellent when it arrived.
2. Do you have reason to believe it was thrashed? no
3. What kinda warrantee? 90 days on motors less freight

In reference to #2, I don't feel Jason would have bought it if it was thrashed... you can hear bearing issues... things like that.

It seems reasonable. If I must, I will skip the hotcam and stay stock... It isn't that important, but if I can, with the motor out, I will do the hotcam. As long as it doesn't need a full clutch kit. If I can get away with a new pilot bearing and a friction disc, I will!

At the minimum, I am going to do the following:

1. Replace all gaskets and seals
a. front timing cover seals.
b. rear main seal.
c. oil pan and oil filter housing gaskets.
d. intake manifold gaskets.
e. head gaskets.
f. valve cover gaskets.

2. If I get the hot cam kit
a. replace cam.
b. replace rockers.
c. replace valve springs.

3. Clutch
a. Test DM - if it passes, great. Clean and use. If it fails, use it to match balance to the Fidenza I already have.
b. Replace friction disc, my pressure plate has only 40k on it and should be good to go.
c. new pilot bushing/bearing.

Well indeed the mexico bit throws a spanner in the works, youre now better off with the used engine and built properly.

I didnt know about any of that.

In the year since I last checked LT1 crate engines, they have totally and completely vanished off the face of the earth.

It's shocking to me... utterly shocking that GM could so ignore an engine line in that manner.

The LTx didn't last all that long - 1992-1997, but it sure was used in a lot of cars:

Corvette - 1992-1996
Camaro/Firebird - 1993-1997
Impala/Roadmaster/Caprice/Cadillac DeVille - 1994-1996.

That's a lot of cars... it really shocks me...

Frankly I'm surprised you're replacing the entire engine with such low mileage. I know it has some issues but you're replacing it with a used engine.

You stated that you're going to:

1. Replace all gaskets and seals
a. front timing cover seals.
b. rear main seal.
c. oil pan and oil filter housing gaskets.
d. intake manifold gaskets.
e. head gaskets.
f. valve cover gaskets.

I'd view this differently if you were going to just bolt in the replacement engine and go...But if you're going to tear down the replacement engine that far it seems to me you could do the same to the engine you have and figure out what the problems are with it and fix it...Vibration problems and all. Now if you have different goals in mind and you just want to have a 383 project on the shelf while you drive around using the replacement motor...That's different. You've had a few problems with this engine and its given you the excuse to drop in another...Well okay. If I had confidence in the replacement motor I was buying I'd drop it in and not look back...Otherwise I wouldn't buy it. Drive time is better than down time. Either way you decide to go I'm sure you'll be happy with the outcome.

Quote:

somewhere in there is where I feel.

Anytime I install something as complex as a used engine, then the gaskets and seals will be replaced. It just makes common sense.

Time is a serious factor. I can do all the prep work in a couple of weekends, and swap the motor in one weekend. A full 383 based rebuild will take much longer. And the 383 I want to build will cost a bunch more than this stop-gap.

The vibration issue with the flywheel can't be easily fixed... and 164k miles isn't chump change on an LT1 - from my observations, more of them fail at about this point than go to 200k. At least it's better than the L98, which has a tendency to toss the head gasket at 75k miles...

I dont know what school of finance you studied, but it really does seem so highly illogical to buy something twice, may as well have what you want first go and be done with, and then in the long term sit back and think just how much money you saved by doing the job right first go.

Pay now or pay twice as much later. You want it, so get it, you may not be here to enjoy it next week.

I just dont see the sense in building 2 engines for one car when you dont desperately need to use the said car everyday.

The flywheel vibration can be easily fixed, throw it away and get a decent one. Fixed.

You are missing the point - I can't be without my car.

I wish I could easily fix the vibration, but it isn't fixable.

Here is the score with that damned vibration - and it's as much my fault as anyones for believing Tom at Carolina Clutch:

The dual mass flywheel (DMFW) is the external rear balance for the LT1. On the DM is a series of small holes that accept small weights that will fine tune the balance. Without those weights, you will get vibration.

As it stands, a new DMWF is $700.00.

I know there is a procedure to fix vibrations for the LT4, what I don't know is if that will directly apply (beyond the scope of the TSB) to an LT1 with a DMFW without any weights.

With Tom's suggestion, I bought a fidenza aluminum SMFW... it supposedly has this weight to balance all LT1s. BULL! It didn't. at 4000 RPM this vibration kicks... and only gets worse as the RPMs increase. I was a moron and an idiot. To add insult to injury, I tossed the old DM, so I can't match balance it.

Ok, so I fix the vibration... I am at $900.00 (cause I will need other clutch parts anyway) and still have a dying headgasket...

The engine I want to build, a quality 383, would not be cheap, and with plans of buying a house within the next couple of years, it's low priority.

I can do this used motor for chump change and perhaps get the 383 bug out of my system for a long while.

So with one fix, I am replacing the flywheel on a maybe... or I am replacing the engine with a maybe... perhaps they are both bad ideas, but I am not in the mood to unass $4k on another maybe...

I will reiterate, used motors are not a bad thing. I know many folks with good experience with them, so it's not a concern.

You'll have to get the red one running first..........

Well all things considered, i would never go so far as to say you are a moron or an idiot!! I still reckon youre a bloody good bloke!! You took the advice of an "expert" and got a bum steer. It happens.

I didnt know you used that car every day though, i thought you had 3 cars there to use between 2 of you!!

I agree there isnt a problem using a used engine, however i was not aware of the fact the crate engines in question were now made in Mexico, cause with this new bit of info i would certainly recomend a used engine over a Mexican crate engine.

Youll get there mate, but sooner rather then later might be a good idea by the sounds of things, or youre not going to have an engine worth a damn!!

Dude just replace what you've got with a used stock engine. No need to overcomplicate it. It's a driver. Spend that extra money on something more productive, like Ninja training camp.

before the clutch fiasco, I wanted to do the hotcam kit on my existing LT1... but that didn't work out... sad...

this is my chance to fulfill that dream...

besides, as far as a used engine is concerned, it's no worse than a used car, but comes with a warrantee.

Mate if youre going to put in a different cam, put in something abit more stout than that!!

I have California smog tests to deal with. I am concerned that too much cam will make passing hard.

even if I can sneak past the test stations, they are now setting up road side infrared sniffers... I don't want/need that kinda grief.

What cam would you suggest that is still smogable?

I like the hotcam kit cause it has it all - cam/rockers/springs/retainers.

Crane mate, and double springs so you can rev it. Crane gold RRs. Ill have abit of a hunt around on the site now mate and get the number of that cam that is good for CA emissions.

This might be the one here mate: and it says (50 STATE LEGAL FOR LISTED APPLICATIONS, C.A.R.B. E.O. D-225-55) BASIC RPM 2800-6500
http://www.cranecams.com/?show=browse ... 241&partType=camshaft

And maybe something like this for springs, you can put these straight on without machining.
http://www.cranecams.com/?show=browse ... =99845-16&showAll=yes

Quote:

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one mate for a couple of reasons. If you read the Crane description carefully this cam is for highly modified engines with high flow heads, headers, exhaust. The only headers legal in California are shorties which flow no more than stock LT1 manifolds according to all reliable sources.

Number two, notice Crane says it is legal for "Listed Applications, 94 and up", those are MAF cars, Andy has a 92 which is a speed density car. Speed density cars require much more in the way of tuning when the cam is changed because the fuel program is based on a stock engine and the manifold pressure the ECM expects to see relative to rpm and throttle position. (The ECM adds fuel based on lower manifold vacuum assuming load has increased)

MAF systems on the other hand measure air flow directly so they can adapt to changes in manifold pressure caused by cam change with less difficulty. I don't think this cam will help power without the heads and long tube headers or pass California emissions.

As you know, im quite well aware of how it all works. If you check the specs of that against the GMPP Hot cam, youll see its not much different, and certainly no reason what so ever it wont work in a 92. If it wont, they is no way known a Hot cam will be the right selection.

If there is going to be such an issue getting this Crane cam to work, youre going to have more issues getting the hot cam to work, cause it has more duration on exhaust, and a 112 LSA as appossed to the Crane Powermax having a 116 LSA.
(specs for 2050: CRN-104241 --- 218@ .498/ 218@ .498 (1.5RR)--- 116 LSA --- 2800-6500 )
(specs for hotcam: LT4 Hot Cam --- 218@ .525/ 228@ .525 (1.6RR)--- 112 LSA --- 1800-5800 RPM )
See above the PowerMax 2050 is what id consider to be a better choice, using either 1.5RRs or 1.6.

The hot cam is NOT for stock unmodded heads either, nor will it gain much if its flowing through shorty headers.

Casey, recall I didn't recommend the Hot Cam either, I don't think either cam will improve power or pass California emissions in a speed density car WITHOUT extensive tuning by someone with experience in the area.

You cant just go and change a cam and not tune it properly anyway. With the 116LSA it should be alot easier to tune, will probably idle quite well, and i reckon itll get better fuel economy too.

And i think youre right there too TopTechx6, i dont think the GMPP Hot cam is emissions compliant in CA, but i cant remember.

I know the LT4HC can pass smog, but not on an OBDII engine...

it just requires a good tune.

I will read all this later!

off to work!

Well if the Hot cam can pass, on a speed density 92, then the Powermax will pass as well, i just reckon itll be a better cam for the task.

I asked Alvin with PCM For Less for his opinion.

We shall see what cam he suggests... I am simply concerned about CARB... after that, drivability.

The LT4 hotcam isn't a bad part, but if something better exists, then I am interested. The best part is the matched set idea... it's all there.

One last question - should I get hardened pushrods?

I think if you need new pushrods you may as well go with chromemoly mate yes.

In looking around the other night i saw there is a kit available that comes with that 2050 cam, and some other stuff as well. Ill see if i can find it again.

Im pretty sure youll have noticed when you looked at the specs i posted up, but the 2050 lift specs were using 1.5:1 rocker arms.

I will check all the links and compare the specs.

The motor ships tomorrow or Friday, so I have time...

So...What's the update on this project? Did the motor come in? Did you inspect it or tear it down yet?

It's not been shipped yet... I am getting a touch inpatient...

And what was the word on that cam i sugested over the GMPP Hot cam?

I need to finish that research, to be honest. I have been rather busy with stuff... and fighting a cold that just doesn't wanna either get going or get gone!

Back to square one... when Jason was prepping the block for shipment, his tech removed the starter - and a chunk of the block came with. It got wacked at some point.

I am going to do some additional research... see what else I can find.

Sorry to hear about the engine. With the extra time you can do some more research and maybe even find a better replacement engine.

Well... my research has been disappointing.

I have another thread going on LT1 balancing issues... no one has replied <sniff>.

However, there are three shops I have called, and they all remove the flywheel and mate it to the transmission for sale, not the engine. I haven't figure that out yet... worse yet, they get ignorant with me when I challenge their logic - or lack thereof. I am willing to learn something new, but jeez, when $1500+ is being thrown around, I ain't that willing.

I called a vendor out here in the LA area - and get this - they want $2700 for a long block, with accessories, harness and computer!!!!! And they don't offer a bare long block! for that kinda coin, I can get a new motor almost... which leads to the next issue...

All crates I have found are $4k on up...

GM no longer offers an LT1 crate... They stopped that a year ago... I learned that from Skoggin Dickey, before the pecker head hung up on me...

I am leaning towards a Camaro motor... but I am nervious, considering how abused they can be.

Camaro isnt an LT1, its an LTi and only a 2 bolt main.

nope... the Camaro (and Firebird) used the LT1. And yes, it is a 2 bolt main.

They share the same designation. The Impala SS uses the LT1 designation, but with iron heads and 2 bolt main.

Neat GM marketing, eh?

Hey Bogus, I know everyne swears by Comp cams and the "hot cam" But I recently installed a new cam and valve train assy. in my sons "fbody LTi" I contacted Isky Cams and bought complete assy. from them. I don't recall exact price but I know they blew Summit completely out of the water with final cost. Their tech dept is fantastic, I gave them the engine specs and they ground one to car specs. They are currently grinding one for the 434 I am building, I've always ran Isky and had fantastic results. Given your Ca. restrictions I am sure they can work within parameters. I would hazard a guess its all in the LSA to pass emissions.
Gene

Quote:
I beg to differ sir. Only the Corvette was fitted with an LT1. The others can be called whatever anyone wants to, but they are not an LT1. LTi yes, LT1, no.

Dont know who made the first mistake of calling the 2 bolt mains an LT1, but you can blame them for many years of misconception.

you're gonna make me prove it. So be it.

This link will take you to the 1993 Camaro RPO Codes.

http://www.chevy-camaro.com/chevy-cam ... -codes-year.asp?year=1993

This shows the history of all Impala SS's, but you need to go down to find the specifics on the 1994 and newer SS's.

They reference the "Baby LT1"... It was called the L99. It was 265 ci.

http://www.goissca.org/imp_hist.htm

And this clears up the usage of the LT1 RPO code.

http://www.speakeasy.org/~miket/9c1_info.htm

In short, there were 5 engines that were based on the architecture:

The L99 was the 265 ci version, used as the base motor in Caprices.

The LT1 was a 350 ci, with iron heads and block and was used in the Impala SS, the Caprice as the optional engine, the Buick Roadmaster and the Cadillac Sedan de Ville. It was also used in the 9C1 police cars. It had 260 hp.

The LT1, as used in the F-Body was an aluminum head, iron block with 2 bolt mains. 275hp on up, depending on options. I think they topped at 327hp for the Firehawk Firebird.

The LT1 as used in the Corvette was the same as above, but with 4 bolt mains. 300hp.

Then comes the LT4, same as above, but with different intake and heads. 330hp.

This is an ad for the Impala SS:



I can't find any visable proof, but I almost bought a Firebird back in 1995... and the option list showed the engine... LT1.

That's where the rumours started... with GM itself.

To summarize, the RPO code is a rather nebulous thing. GM can assign the same RPO code to several SIMILAR things, and because of the car requested the RPO get that item. It's a game of association. The B-Body requests one type of LT1, the F-Body another and the Y-Body, yet another.